BOWERS+v.+HARDWICK

U.S. Supreme Court Bowers v. Hardwick Argued March 31, 1986 - Decided June 30, 1986 Sanareean Keller  Background: Hardwick was charged with committing sodomy. The act is illegal according to a Georgia statute criminalizing sodomy. Although, the act was committed in the privacy of his home with another consenting adult, it was an illegal act. Hardwick challenged the statute on the grounds that his fundamental rights under the constitution was violated. Decision/Rationale: The court held that the Georgia statute was constitutional. Fundamental rights granted by the constitution does not infer that homosexuals have a right to engage in the act of sodomy. The Due Process Clauses would have to be expanded to cover new fundamental rights, which should be resisted. The results of engaging in an illegal act is the same in public or private. Laws can not be invalidated on the basis that the majority does not agree. Implication: Teachers are going to be scrutinized in their personal as well as their professional lives. So, it is very important to use discretion in all of your affairs. Teachers are expected to obey the laws at all cost, in private as well as public. Question:

 Kristee Glace Eric Miller U.S. Supreme Court  ** BOWERS v. HARDWICK, 478 U.S. 186 (1986) **  ** 478 U.S. 186 **  ** BOWERS, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF GEORGIA v. HARDWICK ET AL. ** <span style="background: white; display: block; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-align: center;"> ** Decision: ** <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">The issue in this case involves the right of <span style="color: windowtext; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; text-decoration: none; textunderline: none;">[|privacy] <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">. Since 1965's [|//Griswold v. Connecticut//]<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;"> the Court had held that a right to privacy was implicit in the <span style="color: windowtext; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; text-decoration: none; textunderline: none;">[|due process] <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;"> clause of the <span style="color: windowtext; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; text-decoration: none; textunderline: none;">[|Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution] <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">. In //Bowers//, the Court held that this right did not extend to private, consensual sexual conduct, at least not if it involved homosexual sex. Seventeen years after //Bowers v. Hardwick//, the Supreme Court directly overruled the decision in [|//Lawrence v. Texas//]<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">, 539 U.S. 558 (2003), and held that such laws are unconstitutional. It overruled “//Bowers v. Hardwick//". The same sodomy law that was upheld in //Bowers// was struck down by the Georgia Supreme Court under the Georgia state constitution in the case of [|//Powell v. State//]<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">, 270 Ga. 327 (1998). The remaining state sodomy laws in the U.S. were invalidated, insofar as they applied to private consensual conduct among adults, in the Supreme Court case of [|//Lawrence v. Texas//]<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;"> 539 U.S. 558 (2003).  ** Implications: ** <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">The take home message here is that although you cannot prosecute individuals (teachers or students) for oral or anal sex, it is certainly something that you want to avoid being publicized. By engaging in this sexual practice, a teacher leaves himself/herself open to public embarrassment as well as possible damage to his/her career. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">Quiz question: It is lawful in Georgia to have oral or anal sex? True.
 * CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT **
 * No. 85-140. **
 * Argued March 31, 1986 **
 * Decided June 30, 1986 **
 * Background: This case is about the constitutionality of a Georgia sodomy law criminalizing oral and anal sex in private between consenting adults when applied to homosexuals. Atlanta police officer, Torick was attempting to a serve warrant on Hardwick, for contempt of court, when we witnessed the defendant engaging in oral sex with another man. Officer Torick placed both men under arrest for sodomy. Hardwick then sued, Bowers, the attorney general of Georgia in federal court declaring the state’s sodomy law invalid. Bowers said that as an active homosexual, he would have eventually been prosecuted for his activities. ||

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">Posted by: Joc'Lene Alston

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">U.S. Supremem Court

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">Bowers V. Hardwick

Argued: March 31, 1986 Decided: June 30, 1986

Background:

Hardwick filed suit in Federal District Court after being charged with violating the Georgia statute criminalizing sodomy. He was charged after being caught engaging in the act of sodomy with another adult male in the privacy of his home. The court then granted the defendants' motion to dismiss, because it failed to state a claim. The court of appeals reversed this decision holding that the Georgia statute violated the respondents fundamental rights.

Decision and Rational:

The Court of Appeals reversed the prior ddecision holding that the Georgia statute violated the respondent's fundamental rights. The Georgia statute stands, but the court found that: " The law, however is constantly based on notions of morality, and if all laws representing essentially moral choices are to be invalidated under the Due Process Clause , the courts would be very busy indeed." The respondent argues that majority sentiments about morality of homosexuality should be declared inadequate, but the court did not agree and were unpersuaded that the sodomy laws should be invalidated on that basis.

Impact on Teaching:

Teachers should definitely be aware of how they are percieved by the community. Teachers are held to a high esteem and should always use discretion when committing certain private acts.

True or False: 25 states still carry sodomy laws and people can be prosecuted for violating these laws. (false)